We’ve been living in the same place for many years, I just recently went out to touch the grass and wanted to say that it’s cool there
P.s your whining is very similar to the whining of the Chinese side, which makes it even funnier to read you
? This thread is essentially the same as every thread with russia players complaining that the Mig29 doesnt have R73s so i really dont know what point youre trying to make here other than being annoying
Fair enough, it probably does look obsessive from the outside. But when you spend years grinding and see the same pattern — NATO gear stripped of its key features while Russian stuff gets best-case modeling — it adds up. People aren’t nitpicking for fun, they just want consistency. If Brimstone worked like Brimstone and IRIS like IRIS, there’d be a lot less “obsession” in the first place. balance the game in some other ways than gimping and stripping
2 Likes
If they were equal I’m sure you would have equal performance in these 2 vehicles no?
There is a reason why most people perform better in the 2A7V than in the SEPv1, that reason is that the 2A7V is just simply better.
Not even going to go to the BVM and Type 10 part as that is even more deluded.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
While not as dominant as it once was DM53 is still the best top tier round. DM73 would be excessive, and also most top tier vehicles are lacking their kept capable round, from M829A4 to 3BM59.
Maybe we could see these sorts of rounds added but sure as hell not before major decompression.
In my opinion this is an issue of Gaijin jumping the gun when they added the 2A7 instead of something more balanced and less advanced like the 2E.
3 Likes
Yeah we should make the best tank in game even better.
3 Likes
Loadouts are entirely a balancing decision. It is why many vehicles are missing their core loadout options.
DM53 is already the best shell in the game. There is no need at this time to add anything stronger. As it stands. The leopard 2A7 should already be at 13.0, not 12.0.
At most I could see DM63 added for selective vehicles. But it does not increase pen iirc (might even reduce it slightly?) but might aid a few tanks in their survivability such as the Challenger 3TD
On which model?
SepV2 only has M829A2
Most if not all top tier NATO shells should have this. From L27A1 to the DM53.
Looks at the Challenger 2, Ariete, Merkava, Leclerc, etc etc
Germany and USSR in-Game already get special treatment from Gaijin and Leopard 2A7V is like the last MBT which needs to be buffed. I would love to see it fielding its real Darts too but they first need to start treating all Nations equal.
And as others have said the Leopards DM53 and Gun is already the most powerful in the Game; meanwhile others sit around with longer Reload, worse Darts, worse Armour…worse everything really like so many missing Spall Liners like 99A not getting it years after being added but others get it immediately.
So if they do give the Leopard the Dm73 they need to give all other Nations their Top Shells as well and when they add Spall Liners to some like already the most protected Tanks they should do so for the weaker ones who need it more like 99A too, i think the M1A2 are missing theirs too
No idea how some of the Top MBTs like Italys Ariete, Chinas 99A/VT4A1/WZ1001 and so are even sitting at the same BR as Swedens STRV122 or Germanys Leopard 2A5+
You’re asking to buff the current best #1 MBT tied with strv 122.
2 Likes
Get over it please. We need the 2A7 at 13.0+ not just 12.3 or 12.7. This should coincidence with many other MBTs raising in BR.
If they do that they can go ahead and put it at 15.0, by itself, with the closest vehicle being 13.7 :)
Stop asking for the best MBT in the game to be buffed, then acting like the buff would only put it at 12.3 when everybody has already concluded we need far more than 12.0 simply for decompression sake. Your 2a7 is the same BR as your 2a5. Figure it out chief.
2 Likes
The thread has gone massively off-topic. Be reminded that the topic is JUST the ammunition being absent on the 2A7V. Nothing more, nothing less.
Please cut the off-topic stuff and keep the topic on rails, as it should be.
We are already starting to use DM83, weird to ask for DM73 now
Such silly logic some people live in:
‘This nation gets this round from this or that generation, this year of production, this year of introduction… so why does my tank have older round???’
This happens all the time when discussing Chinese vehicles.
It’s all about capabilities. Not just how capable it is - but how capable it needs to be to fit the current balancing regime. How capable it is in regard with other strengths and weaknesses of the vehicles that field it, and vehicles that will have to face it.
1 Like
Its ahistorical. DM53 wasn’t in service anymore, by decades, as A7 was commissioned.
The high pressure gun L55A1 was especially made to fire DM73 and the upcoming DM83 (project name KE2020NEO, rumored to have 20% more punch than the previous one and immunity to latest ERA). But still A7 has to use 30+ year old shells it never saw irl.
Same as the Gepard A1, which was all about the FAPDS ammunition, which is somehow denied. These restrictions prevent any tech progression for German vehicles. (While Ru gets always its latest shells, latest AGMs and latest ATGMs).
You ragebaiting?
Saying this like it isn’t already the best top tier hands down, and an absolute monster.
1 Like
???
Other nations have DIRCM as well???
Also Russia is among the weakest nations at top tier.
Russia’s modern shells are significantly worse than the US/German ones we have in game. Zero reason to cope about this.
Its technically not even possible to fire DM53 with the A7, since the fire control system won’t recognize them. DM53 is out of service since, many, many years. DM53A1, the next upgrade, was also retired and all remaining stocks given away to a certain country. In service are DM63, DM73 and soon DM83. But still Leopard 2A7 is using a shell from 1997 or something. WT and realism, yes yes.